America, sometimes I despair of thee.

[nfisher1226]

Sylph - while I understand the intent I can say that I've lived 37 years in the USA without having to dodge a bullet. Furthermore I'm not the only one with that experience. Most of us go our entire lives without ever having a gun waved in our face.

There is hysteria coming from both directions on the issue. There is sensationalist journalism clouding it. There are of course serious incidents that have occurred and need to be addressed. The extreme viewpoints on both sides tend to create a situation where nothing gets done, and frankly I find that to be a bigger problem than the guns themselves.

[EvenOlderButWiser]

The extreme viewpoints on both sides tend to create a situation where nothing gets done, and frankly I find that to be a bigger problem than the guns themselves.

But isn't that one of the arguments used by the NRA?:



I think that part of the issue is that there is no common middle ground. You have the anti-gun lobby who want everything banned, and you have the NRA who steadfastly refuse to accept that there is a need for any form of gun control. As a result neither side are willing to compromise on their viewpoint so there is no dialogue between either group.

The same viewpoint is mirrored within the US political system, hence the political deadlock on the issue.

ObW
X

[partis]

The most common death by shooting in America is suicide. It wasnt a suprise. Im sure if guns were legal here, there would be more suicides too but we have our knife culture or just getting kicked in the head culture (so much friendlier than your gun culture) maybe we should ban bread knifes and foot wear.

Yeah sometimes i wished i had a high powered automatic rifle so i could take bad guys out… but im pleased i live in a country where they cant do the same thing and police are unarmed.

[princealbertofb]

It's not normal.

But gun confiscation isn't normal either.

A government wouldn't have to confiscate guns that people didn't actually possess. Which is the point. Not to have them in the first place. We don't have guns around here. There's no confiscation going on.

[princealbertofb]

... ...Its time to get back to your knives and poles.

Just my view.

ObW
X

And karate classes?

[nfisher1226]

But isn't that one of the arguments used by the NRA?:



I think that part of the issue is that there is no common middle ground. You have the anti-gun lobby who want everything banned, and you have the NRA who steadfastly refuse to accept that there is a need for any form of gun control. As a result neither side are willing to compromise on their viewpoint so there is no dialogue between either group.

The same viewpoint is mirrored within the US political system, hence the political deadlock on the issue.

ObW
X

You actually just reinforced my point with that. Nothing gets done, because the two sides are so far apart they aren't even looking for a place to meet in the middle. Because they're extremists. An extremist goes all the way in one direction on an issue and closes his ears to any other viewpoint.

[princealbertofb]

Theft is not normal even when conducted by the government. If you think it is, you have a problem.

But our constitution forbids gun confiscation so we don't have to worry about that here in America.

Are there any forms of confiscation that the constitution does allow?
House repossession? Car repossession? Your pension schemes repossession?

[princealbertofb]

Alright, then don't be around them. People have a right to guns (as stated in the Constitution) and you actually don't have a right to not be exposed to guns.

Laws can be challenged and changed, and so can constitutions if the whole of the country agrees (that's unlikely to happen, I'm afraid)... but are you ok with what you wrote (in pink?)

[princealbertofb]

Our constitution is the framework of our nation. If we get rid of the constitution, we lose everything that makes America what it is.

The American Constitution has a lot of good stuff in it, but it also said, at the time of writing in 1787 that a slave was worth 3/5 of a human being. Now slavery is illegal in the states and no one could ever be considered to be worth three fifths of a human being (normally)... We all look to the United States as the place where things can evolve and a place where people strive to make it a better place for all to live (and I believe a lot of Americans actually believe that's what their place and task is in the world : spreading the idea of more freedom, more human rights)...

The shootings going on in the USA are just as shocking as any bomb attack going on in Syria, in Egypt or wherever they happen. Why can you not accept an attack like 9/11 but then accept that people get slaughtered daily by crazy gun toting individuals who aren't even foreign enemies? That's what I don't understand. These double standards that are make no sense to me.

How do you explain that in Switzerland most people own a gun, especially males, I guess, because they have obligatory military duty as reservists for the best part of their adult life and yet, the Swiss don't have the shocking numbers of gun related deaths? There is regulation and control, though.

If we accept that our freedom to drive as fast as we want can be regulated, then why not the right to own weapons? I know it's no more acceptable to kill someone while driving than to kill them by shooting them, but why are things done to restrict speed, and drunken driving, but nothing to prevent people using guns any old how?

[nfisher1226]

You make a good point about how the constitution has in fact been modified via amendment. In the constitution proper a slave was counted as 3/5ths of a man for purposes of delegating representatives. This was superseded by the 13th amendment which abolished slavery in it's entirety. Nor is this the only example.

There are a number of gender specific sections in the original constitution regarding voting. This was changed.

The voting age was set at 21 up until recent history. Even the text of certain amendments includes the number 21 as the age at which the right to vote was granted.

The sale of alcohol was banned via constitutional amendment. The amendment in question was modified via a later constitutional amendment and all but one section was nullified.

So what should be taken away is this. The constitution has been amended 27 times in our history, and quite a number of the modifications have changed previous amendments. It is not at all far fetched or unlikely to expect that in the future there might be further clarifications of modifications to the Bill of Rights and the Constitution.